Equality and Diversity in Research Name Job title Research Councils UK

Equality and Diversity: why does it matter to RCUK? An organisation’s success and competitiveness depends on its ability to embrace diversity and draw on the skills, understanding and experience of its people. The potential rewards of diversity are significant: recruiting staff from the widest possible pool will unlock talent and make a major contribution to the impact of research and will benefit the economic and social wellbeing of the UK. RCUK expects that equality and diversity therefore is embedded at all levels and in all aspects of normal research practice.

RCUK’s Statement of Expectations RCUK’s Statement of Expectations for Equality and Diversity published in January 2013. Intended to drive more rapid cultural change in the management of equality and diversity in institutions receiving Research Council funding. In line with legislation in the Equality Act 2010, higher education institutions must have policies in place to address equality and diversity issues. Statement developed to assess whether policies are working in practice, embedded at all levels in institutions, and take account of the whole spectrum of equality and diversity issues. Research Councils recommend that the evidence includes: participation in schemes such as Athena SWAN, Project Juno, Investors in People, Stonewall Diversity Champions and other similar initiatives to demonstrate departmental level action input prepared for the Research Excellence Framework research environment at unit of assessment level appropriate benchmarking data (e.g. heidi equality reports from HESA data) evidence of the application of the ‘Every Researcher Counts resource’ to support this work other available and pertinent management information Assurance – will add a question(s) to assurance - will need to liaise with colleagues in HR, E&D, Research office etc Implementation both within HEIs and RCs crucial Workshop this afternoon

Expectations RCUK expects those in receipt of Research Council funding to: promote and lead cultural change in relation to equalities and diversity engage staff at all levels with improving the promotion of equality and diversity ensure all members of the research workforce are trained and supported to address disincentives and indirect obstacles to recruitment, retention and progression in research careers provide evidence of ways in which equality and diversity issues are managed at both an institutional and department level Research Councils recommend that the evidence includes: participation in schemes such as Athena SWAN, Project Juno, Investors in People, Stonewall Diversity Champions and other similar initiatives to demonstrate departmental level action input prepared for the Research Excellence Framework research environment at unit of assessment level appropriate benchmarking data (e.g. heidi equality reports from HESA data) evidence of the application of the ‘Every Researcher Counts resource’ to support this work other available and pertinent management information Assurance – will add a question(s) to assurance - will need to liaise with colleagues in HR, E&D, Research office etc Implementation both within HEIs and RCs crucial Workshop this afternoon

Evidence RCUK recommends that the evidence includes: participation in schemes such as Athena SWAN, Project Juno, Investors in People, Stonewall Diversity Champions and other similar initiatives to demonstrate departmental level action input prepared for the Research Excellence Framework research environment at unit of assessment level appropriate benchmarking data (eg heidi equality reports from HESA data) evidence of the application of the ‘Every Researcher Counts resource’ to support this work other available and pertinent management information

RCUK’s responsibilities RCUK will: review the overall effectiveness of the approach at a Departmental / Institutional level through its Audit and Assurance Programme discuss equality and diversity at Institutional visits reserve the right to introduce more formal accreditation requirements for grant funding should significant improvement not be evidenced.

Questions? Thank you